Dear User,
Welcome to the EMAP Agricultural Lands 1994-1995 Fall Questionnaire
Datasets. The following material describes the variables from the
main dataset, including certain extra identifier variables and
certain derived indices.
Warnings to users:
Sample numbers (SAMPNO) started again from 1 in 1995, so
they represent a different set of fields in the two years.
To get a unique field identifier, you can use SAMPLE which is a
combination of QYEAR and SAMPNO.
The organization of this dataset is such that you are guaranteed
of misusing the data if you do not carefully read these metadata
first. It was not designed that way, but it is a fact.
Cautions to users:
(1) Problems arising due to the merging of data from
different years.
First of all, note that the target sample size was
different between the two years, 150 in 1994 and 200
in 1995. Also, the state of North Carolina was sampled
in 1995 but not in 1994. When calculating statistics,
be sure to use the variable E, the expansion factor.
This is the number of acres represented in the MAIA
region by each sample unit. The two different years are
to be considered an extended sample of the same resource.
They should not be used to try to analyze year-to-year
change. The NASS sampling scheme, described completely
in Cotter and Nealon (1987) is a stratified, two-stage
sample.
Cotter, J. and J. Nealon. 1987. Area Frame Design for
Agricultural Surveys. USDA, NASS, Research and
Applications Division, Area Frame Section, Washington,
DC.
Many variables represent things for the "current" or
past years. These are all relative to the year in which
the survey was done. For example, if QYEAR=1994, then
LTCROP1-LTCROP4 refer to crops in the field during
the 1994 crop year (i.e. everything from after the last
harvest of 1993 through the last harvest of 1994). On
the other hand, if QYEAR=1995, these same variables refer
to the 1995 crop year.
Some definitions differed between the two years. A
major change was that in 1994, a field was considered
to be mulch-tilled if residue was managed up until the
seeding operation. This was corrected in 1995 to only
include situations where residue was managed through
the seeding operation (and beyond). Further, the codes
for manure types are completely different between the
two years. Use the appropriate format as described below.
(2) Problems arising due to the structure of the data
There are many instances where a zero represents missing
data. Before including an observation in any analysis,
be sure that the completion code for its section (and for
the questionnaire as a whole) indicates valid data. This
needs to be done with great care, as some data are only
meaningful if a previous question was answered a certain
way. E.g. the year of last tillage is only meaningful
if the field was not tilled (or no-till or strip till)
during the current year. Furthermore, there are variables
where a zero might have more than one meaning. For example,
a yield (and harvested acreage) of zero might represent crop
failure, or it might mean that harvest was yet to be done
when the enumerator arrived.
(3) Discrepancies in what is considered out-of-scope
Pasture and idle land were not supposed to be eligible
for sampling in the Fall survey, but for various reasons
some samples do consist partly or entirely of one of
these other resources. Soil samples sometimes were and
sometimes were not taken in those situations, so be sure
to use the crop and land use data in conjunction with
the soil data.
(4) Users are responsible for outlier checks.
Some outliers were excluded from the calculation of the
derived indices, such as observed/expected yields, but
the raw data were not deleted from the dataset. It is
the responsibility of the user to check for and exclude
any data point that he or she deems to be an outlier.
Notes to users:
Unless otherwise specified, a variable refers to the crop
year in which the questionnaire was completed. A crop year
begins after the last harvest of the previous calendar year
and ends with the last harvest of the current calendar year.
Unless otherwise specified, the answers to yes/no questions
are coded as 0=no 1=yes. For other variables containing
coded responses, there are three possible places where the
codes may be described: in this metadata file, in the format
statements provided with these metadata (which formats apply
to which variables are listed below), and in the coding
sheets that came along with the NASS documentation. The
coding sheets are under documentation\94\codesheets (or \95\
for for 1995). The files are named sec6_94.wpd or sec6_95.wpd
and are in WordPerfect format. You should only need to rely
on the code sheets in the case of the pesticide product and
active ingredient codes, and the target pest codes.
For dates expressed as MMDDYY when the month is between
January and September, the leading zero is omitted. Thus
92194 means September 21, 1994.
There are some inconsistencies in how missing data are
coded. A period (.) always indicates a missing value, but
a zero (0) can also indicate missing data. Often the latter
was used in the original dataset as received by NASS, and
the former was used when correcting the data, in case some
value had to be set to missing. The SAS variable .M is also
used in the original data to indicate a missing datum.
In the pesticide data, a .U is used to indicate a missing
value for the concentration of active ingredient in a product
(Used for preparations of Bacillus thuringiensis.)
The main dataset includes everything except for applications of
commercial fertilizers and pesticides. These are found in separate
datasets (FERT9495 and PEST9495). There are separate documentation
files for those datasets (below), so be sure to read them carefully,
especially since the structure of those datasets is different than
for the main data. A key difference is that in the main dataset
there is exactly one observation for each intended sample field. In
the FERT and PEST datasets, there will be no observation for fields
that received no fertilizer or pesticide, respectively, and there
will be more than one observation per sample field if there was
more than one application to the sample field.
---------------------- HEADER ------------------------
Dataset: 1994/1995 Fall Survey "MAIN" Dataset
File Name: main9495.csv
Date Created: 29 July 1998
#Variables: 178
#Observations: 350
Missing value symbol: . or 0 or .M (see warnings above)
QYEAR Survey year (YYYY)
SAMPLE coded sample number with year as first two digits, sampno as middle
three digits, and last digit 0; use SAMPLE to link to other datasets
SAMPNO Sequential sample number, within year
STATE State code (format statname.)
SEGCODE NASS SEGMENT identifier (scrambled) - use to link to JES data
E Expansion factor to be used when combining
data across the two QYEARs.
------------------- FP - Face Page --------------------
FPRC Face Page Response Code
3=accepted interview ---> see footnote
8=refused interview (no data)
9=grower inaccessible (no data)
------------ FI - Field Identification Section -----------
FINUMAC Number of acres in field
FICROPAC Number of cropland acres in field (NASS definition)
FIOWN Own or rent field
1=owned
2=rented, leased, or used rent-free
--------- LT - Cropping and Tillage History Section ---------
LTCROP1 Crop or land use, current crop year (format cropname.)
LTCROP2 Crop or land use, current crop year (format cropname.)
LTCROP3 Crop or land use, current crop year (format cropname.)
LTCROP4 Crop or land use, current crop year (format cropname.)
LTCROP5 Crop or land use, previous crop year (format cropname.)
LTCROP6 Crop or land use, previous crop year (format cropname.)
LTCROP7 Crop or land use, previous crop year (format cropname.)
LTCROP8 Crop or land use, previous crop year (format cropname.)
LTCROP9 Crop or land use, two crop years ago (format cropname.)
LTCROP10 Crop or land use, two crop years ago (format cropname.)
LTCROP11 Crop or land use, two crop years ago (format cropname.)
LTCROP12 Crop or land use, two crop years ago (format cropname.)
LTPLT1 Acres planted, current crop year
LTPLT2 Acres planted, current crop year
LTPLT3 Acres planted, current crop year
LTPLT4 Acres planted, current crop year
LTPLT5 Acres planted, previous crop year
LTPLT6 Acres planted, previous crop year
LTPLT7 Acres planted, previous crop year
LTPLT8 Acres planted, previous crop year
LTPLT9 Acres planted, two crop years ago
LTPLT10 Acres planted, two crop years ago
LTPLT11 Acres planted, two crop years ago
LTPLT12 Acres planted, two crop years ago
LTHRVT1 Acres of LTCROP1 harvested
LTHRVT2 Acres of LTCROP2 harvested
LTHRVT3 Acres of LTCROP3 harvested
LTHRVT4 Acres of LTCROP4 harvested
LTYPA1 Average yield per acre of LTCROP1
LTYPA2 Average yield per acre of LTCROP2
LTYPA3 Average yield per acre of LTCROP3
LTYPA4 Average yield per acre of LTCROP4
LTWGT1 Unit weight of LTYPA1 (pounds)
LTWGT2 Unit weight of LTYPA2 (pounds)
LTWGT3 Unit weight of LTYPA3 (pounds)
LTWGT4 Unit weight of LTYPA4 (pounds)
LTDATE1 Planting date for LTCROP1 (MMDDYY)
LTDATE2 Planting date for LTCROP2 (MMDDYY)
LTDATE3 Planting date for LTCROP3 (MMDDYY)
LTDATE4 Planting date for LTCROP4 (MMDDYY)
LTDATEH1 Harvest date for LTCROP1 (MMDDYY)
LTDATEH2 Harvest date for LTCROP2 (MMDDYY)
LTDATEH3 Harvest date for LTCROP3 (MMDDYY)
LTDATEH4 Harvest date for LTCROP4 (MMDDYY)
LTECMA1 First erosion control method for LTCROP1 (format econtrol.)
LTECMB1 Second erosion control method for LTCROP1 (format econtrol.)
LTECMC1 Third erosion control method for LTCROP1 (format econtrol.)
LTECMA2 First erosion control method for LTCROP2 (format econtrol.)
LTECMB2 Second erosion control method for LTCROP2 (format econtrol.)
LTECMC2 Third erosion control method for LTCROP2 (format econtrol.)
LTECMA3 First erosion control method for LTCROP3 (format econtrol.)
LTECMB3 Second erosion control method for LTCROP3 (format econtrol.)
LTECMC3 Third erosion control method for LTCROP3 (format econtrol.)
LTECMA4 First erosion control method for LTCROP4 (format econtrol.)
LTECMB4 Second erosion control method for LTCROP4 (format econtrol.)
LTECMC4 Third erosion control method for LTCROP4 (format econtrol.)
LTTCROP1 Crop or land use for tillage, current crop year (format cropname.)
LTTCROP2 Crop or land use for tillage, current crop year (format cropname.)
LTTCROP3 Crop or land use for tillage, current crop year (format cropname.)
LTTCROP4 Crop or land use for tillage, current crop year (format cropname.)
LTTTYPE1 Type of tillage used on LTTCROP1 (format tillname.)
LTTTYPE2 Type of tillage used on LTTCROP2 (format tillname.)
LTTTYPE3 Type of tillage used on LTTCROP3 (format tillname.)
LTTTYPE4 Type of tillage used on LTTCROP4 (format tillname.)
NEWTILL Corrected type of tillage for the survey year (format tillname.)
The NEWTILL for 1995 is sometimes just a guess, but sometimes is an
improvement over the errors that were in the dataset but that were not
corrected to the original LTTTYPE1-LTTTYPE4 variables. Besides,
NEWTILL applies to the field overall. Note that a field
which was SRM for the first crop will be rated SRM overall, even though
the second crop might have been no-tilled.
LTTLSTP1 Year the field was last plowed, harrowed, disked, or chiseled (YYYY)
LTTLSTP2 Year the field was last plowed, harrowed, disked, or chiseled (YYYY)
LTTLSTP3 Year the field was last plowed, harrowed, disked, or chiseled (YYYY)
LTTLSTP4 Year the field was last plowed, harrowed, disked, or chiseled (YYYY)
Note: the variable NEWLTILL represents an improvement over the
four variables LTTLSTP1-LTTLSTP4
NEWLTILL Corrected last year of tillage (YYYY), if NEWTILL=1 or 2
LTEVAL Has the NRCS evaluated this field since 1985? (0=no, 1=yes)
LTHIEROD Has the NRCS classified this field as "Highly Erodible"? (0=no, 1=yes)
LTDCOC1 Double/cover code for LTCROP1 (format dccode.)
LTDCOC2 Double/cover code for LTCROP2 (format dccode.)
LTDCOC3 Double/cover code for LTCROP3 (format dccode.)
LTDCOC4 Double/cover code for LTCROP4 (format dccode.)
NEWDCOC1 Corrected LTDCOC1 (format dccode.)
NEWDCOC2 Corrected LTDCOC2 (format dccode.)
NEWDCOC3 Corrected LTDCOC3 (format dccode.)
NEWDCOC4 Corrected LTDCOC4 (format dccode.)
---------------- FU - Fertilizer Usage History Section ------------------
FUCC Fertilizer usage section completion code
0=useable data
1=nonuseable data, refused
3=useable data, no fertilizers applied
FULG Was any lime or gypsum used on this field for any crop?
FUCROPL Crop to which lime was applied (format cropname.)
FUCROPG Crop to which gypsum was applied (format cropname.)
FUTONL Tons of lime applied
FUTONG Tons of gypsum applied
FUACREL Acres treated with lime
FUACREG Acres treated with gypsum
FUDATEL Date treated with lime (MMDDYY)
FUDATEG Date treated with gypsum (MMDDYY)
FUMANURE Was any manure or municipal sludge applied to this field?
FUCROP1 Crop to which manure or sludge was applied (format cropname.)
FUCROP2 Crop to which manure or sludge was applied (format cropname.)
FUCROP3 Crop to which manure or sludge was applied (format cropname.)
FUTYPE1 Type of munure applied for FUCROP1
(format manutype. for 1994, format manurnew. for 1995)
FUTYPE2 Type of munure applied for FUCROP2
(format manutype. for 1994, format manurnew. for 1995)
FUTYPE3 Type of munure applied for FUCROP3
(format manutype. for 1994, format manurnew. for 1995)
FURATE1 Manure rate applied per acre for FUCROP1
FURATE2 Manure rate applied per acre for FUCROP2
FURATE3 Manure rate applied per acre for FUCROP3
FUUNIT1 Units for FURATE1 (1=pound, 2=hundred weight, 3=ton)
FUUNIT2 Units for FURATE2 (1=pound, 2=hundred weight, 3=ton)
FUUNIT3 Units for FURATE3 (1=pound, 2=hundred weight, 3=ton)
FUACTRT1 Acres treated with manure for FUCROP1
FUACTRT2 Acres treated with manure for FUCROP2
FUACTRT3 Acres treated with manure for FUCROP3
FUDATE1 Date manure applied (MMDDYY)
FUDATE2 Date manure applied (MMDDYY)
FUDATE3 Date manure applied (MMDDYY)
FUSLURR1 Form of manure (1=slurry, 2=solid)
FUSLURR2 Form of manure (1=slurry, 2=solid)
FUSLURR3 Form of manure (1=slurry, 2=solid)
FUCOMMFT Were commercial fertilizers applied to this field?
(If yes, see the FERT dataset for that particular year)
------------------ PM - Pest Management Section ------------------
PMCC Pest management section completion code
0=useable data
1=nonuseable data, refused
PMPACC Were any pesticides (such as herbicides, fungicides,
nematicides, fumigants, defoliants or growth regulators)
applied to this field?
PMIPM Are you currently using Integrated Pest Management (IPM) for
insect or mite control in this field? (1=yes, 2=no, 3=don't know)
PMMONITR Were insects, mites, or thier damage monitored in this field?
PMWHO Who did the majority of pest/damage monitoring?
1=self or family member
2=employee
3=extension agents
4=chemical dealer
5=commercial scouting service
6=someone else
PMWHAT What was the primary method used to monitor pests/damage
in this field?
1=crop damage observed
2=field insect counts collected
3=insect traps
4=extension reports
5=other
PMANYRES [If insecticides used in field] Did you experience a pest
control failure due to insects or mites showing resistance
to pesticides in this field? (This question 1995 only)
1=yes
2=no
3=don't know
PMPESTRS What was the primary pest that showed resistance?
(This question 1995 only)
901=stink bugs
902=boll worms
(Note, in the PEST datset they are coded as 888, OTHER,
assuming that these were the primary target pests.
The use of these nonstandard codes is just for this
question).
PMPSTCDE What pesticide was the pest resistant to?
(1995 only. See separate table of pesticide codes.)
PMANYDIF Different pesticide applied to control resistant pest.
(1995 only. See separate table of pesticide codes.)
PMROTATE Do you currently have a crop rotation plan for this field?
PMROTYR What is the length, in years, of your crop rotation on
this field? This variable is as received. Don't use it.
PMROTYRF The variable PMROTYR had to be fixed in 1994, because
there were values of 1, which don't make sense. Use this
instead of PMROTYR
------------- ID - Irrigation and Drainage Section ------------------
IDCC Irrigation and drainage section completion code
0=useable data
1=nonuseable data, refused
3=useable data, no irrigation and no drainage
IDIRRIG Was field irrigated?
IDCROP1 Crop irrigated (format cropname.)
IDCROP2 Crop irrigated (format cropname.)
IDCROP3 Crop irrigated (format cropname.)
IDACRE1 Acres of IDCROP1 irrigated
IDACRE2 Acres of IDCROP2 irrigated
IDACRE3 Acres of IDCROP3 irrigated
IDSRC1 Water source for IDCROP1
1=purchased water
2=wells
3=ponds
4=lakes, rivers, canals
5=other
IDSRC2 Water source for IDCROP2 (see codes for IDSRC1)
IDSRC3 Water source for IDCROP3 (see codes for IDSRC1)
IDTILE Number of acres of field drained by subsurface drains.
--------------------- FH - Field History Section ----------------------
FHLIME1 Was lime applied to the field in the crop year prior to
the current year?
FHLIME2 Was lime applied to the field two crop years ago?
FHNEM1 Was nematicide applied to the field in the crop year prior to
the current year?
FHNEM2 Was nematicide applied to the field two crop years ago?
FHHERB1 Was herbicide applied to the field in the crop year prior to
the current year?
FHHERB2 Was herbicide applied to the field two crop years ago?
FHFUNG1 Was fungicide applied to the field in the crop year prior to
the current year?
FHFUNG2 Was fungicide applied to the field two crop years ago?
FHFUM1 Was a fumigant applied to the field in the crop year prior to
the current year?
FHFUM2 Was a fumigant applied to the field two crop years ago?
FHSLUDGE Was municipal sludge applied to this field in any of the
four crop seasons before the current year?
-------- PH - Postharvest Section (between harvest and interview) -------
PHCC Postharvest Section Completion Code
0=useable data
PHTONL Tons of lime applied postharvest
PHACREL Acres treated with lime postharvest
PHDATEL Date lime applied postharvest (MMDDYY)
PHTONG Tons of gypsum applied postharvest
PHACREG Acres treated with gypsum postharvest
PHDATEG Date gypsum applied postharvest (MMDDYY)
FUTYPE4 Type of manure applied postharvest, 1995 only (format manurnew.)
FURATE4 Rate of FUTYPE4 applied per acre, 1995 only
FUUNIT4 Units for FUTYPE4 (1=pounds, 2=hundred weight, 3=tons), 1995 only
FUACTRT4 Acres treated with FUTYPE4, 1995 only
FUDATE4 Date manure FUTYPE4 was applied (MMDDYY), 1995 only
FUSLURR4 Form of manure FUTYPE4 (1=slurry, 2=solid), 1995 only
PHANYTIL Was this field tilled after harvest? (1=yes 2=no), 1995 only
PHTILDT If PHANYTIL=1, when was the field last tilled (MMDDYY)
In 1994, there was no PHANYTIL, so a missing value for
PHTILDT means that it had been tilled after harvest, but
the date was not known. There are some uncorrected problems
with PHTILDT, e.g. dates in improper format, or misinterpretations
where the tillage referred-to is in a prior year.
PHPARTIC Would you be willing to participate again in a
similar study? (1=yes, 2=no), 1995 only
------------------------ BP - Back Page ---------------------------
BPRESP Who was the respondent? (1=operator/manager, 2=spouse, 3=other)
BPRECORD Were farm records used to report the majority of the data?
BPDATE Date interview ended (MMDDYY)
------------------ SS - Soil Sample Record Keeping ------------------
SSDATE Date sample taken (MMDDYY)
------------- Further notes on certain variables: -------------------
FPRC If FPRC is not equal to three, the only variables that have
meaningful data are the identifiers (e.g. QYEAR, SAMPNO, STATE) and
the soil sample recordkeeping variables SSCC and SSDATE.
NEWTILL Because of internal inconsistencies in the data, and with the idea
that it would be better to just assign one value to the tillage used
on the field that year, this variable should be used instead of the
LTTTYPE1-LTTTYPE4 series from the original questionnaire data.
NEWLTILL Because sometimes years were coded as YY instead of YYYY, and because
it would be better to have only one variable representing the last year
of tillage in those situations where NEWTILL indicates no tillage or
no-till, this variable should be used instead of the LTTLSTP1-LTTLSTP4
series from the original questionnaire data.
NEWDCOC1-NEWDCOC4
There were a lot of bad data for the LTDCOC1-LTDCOC4 variables. Based
on the crops reported, their acreages in the field, and their planting
dates, these were reevaluated and assigned NEWDCOC1-NEWDCOC4, where
0=single crop on field or on part of the field that year
1=double crop (two crops in succession that year) or interseeded crops
2=cover crop (a crop that was planted but never intended for harvest)
These codes are set to missing if there is no corresponding LTCROP.
Full definitions of the tillage types, from the 1995 Interviewers Manual:
(which in turn were based on information from the 1994 NRCS National
Handbook of Conservation Practices and the Conservation Technology Information
Center's 1994 National Corp Residue Management Study).
NONE: These include perennial hay and idle croplant, but NOT any system
where seed was sown for the 1995 crop year.
NO-TILL: Managing the amount, orientation and distribution of crop and
other plant residues on the soil surface year-round, while
growing crops in narrow slots in previously untilled soil and
residue.
STRIP TILL: Managing the amount, orientation and distribution of crop and
other plant residues on the soil surface year-round, while
growing crops in narrow tilled strips (no more than one-fourth
of the row width) in previously untilled soil and residue.
RIDGE TILL: Managing the amount, orientation and distribution of crop and
other plant residues on the soil surface year-round, while
growing crops on preformed ridges alternated with furrows protected
by crop residue.
MULCH TILL: Managing the amount, orientation and distribution of crop and
other plant residues on the soil surface year-round, while
growing crops where the entire field surface is tilled prior to
planting. Residue must be managed through the seeding operation.
Tillage operation shall be limited to methods that leave residue
on the surface.
SEASONAL RESIDUE MANAGMENT: Managing the amount, orientation and distribution
of crop and plant residues on the soil surface during part of the
year, while growing crops in a clean tilled seedbed. This category
includes conventional tillage practices such as moldboard plowing.
These definitions were modified from information from the NRCS
National Handbook of Conservation Practices: Notice #114 450-VI,
June 1994, along with information from the Executive Summary
of the 1994 National Crop Residue Management Survey done by the
Conservation Technology Information Center. The 1994 definitions
were essentially the same, except that mulch-till was incorrectly
defined as managing residue _up to_ the seeding operation, rather
than _through_ the seeding operation. This was taken into consideration
when the values of NEWTILL were assigned.
----------- comments on special cases for certain fields ---------------
These provide examples of how knowledge of individual fields may affect
use and interpretation of the data. MCOMMENT refers to the main survey
dataset and PCOMMENT the pesticide dataset.
MCOMMENT ... 1994 Fall Data 1
11:42 Wednesday, May 3, 1995
OBS SAMPNO
1 24
2 101
3 111
4 120
5 123
6 134
7 136
OBS (see above for 1994 SAMPNO corresponding)
1 THE FIELD FOR SAMPLE NO. 4197 WAS INCORRECTLY CHOSEN.
1 IN JUNE, REPORTED FIELD WAS 17 ACRES OF HAY. ENUM. CHOSE
1 PASTURE FIELD.
2 NO CHEMICALS WERE APPLIED BY OPERATOR SINCE THIS FIELD IS
2 SO SUSCEPTIBLE TO RUNOFF FROM NEIGHBOR'S FIELDS. NOTE ALSO
2 CATTLE BEING PASTURED IN FIELD WHEN SAMPLED.
3 THIS FIELD WAS DISKED ON SEPT. 20 AND 22ND, THEN PLANTED TO
3 BARLEY ON SEPT 25, 1994.
3
4 THIS FIELD WAS DISKED ON OCT 15 AND 17 AND WAS THEN PLANTED
4 TO OATS ON OCT 17 1994
4
5 SOIL SAMPLE TAKEN ON 11/03/94 AFTER FIELD WAS DISKED AND
5 DRILLED FOR WHEAT ON OCT 15.
5
6 THIS FIELD WAS DISKED AND PLANTED TO WHEAT ON SEP 25, 1994.
6
6
7 THIS FIELD HAD CHICKEN MANURE APPLIED ON OCT 4 1994. THE
7 MANURE WAS APPLIED FOR THE 1995 BARLEY CROP AT 2 TONS PER
7 ACRE, SOLID. THE BARLEY WAS PLANTED ON OCT 5.
PCOMMENT ... 1994 Fall Data 1
11:42 Wednesday, May 3, 1995
S
S A T
T L M A
O A I P B
B T N N L C C C
S E E O E 1 2 3
1 51 3 123 2 ENUMERATOR VERIFIED THAT RESPONDENT REPORTED THAT BUTENONE
WAS USED ON THE OPERATOR'S CORN ACRES.
---------------------- HEADER ------------------------
Dataset: 1994/1995 Fall Survey "FERT" Dataset
File Name: fert9495.csv
Date Created: 31 July 1998
#Variables: 16
#Observations: 295
Missing value symbol: . or 0 or .M (see warnings above)
This dataset contains information on applications of commercial
fertilizer to the sample field. Note that not every field is
represented in this dataset and that there may be more than one
observation (fertilizer application) per field. Be sure to check
the variable FUCC in the MAIN dataset to be sure that these
questions were answered. Note: in 1995 we encouraged the explicit
reporting of 0 fertilizer applied to second crops within a field
that had more than one crop, to indicate that it truly had no
fertilizer applied, as opposed to being forgotten. DATEF, METHODF,
and ACRETRTF are also set to 0 in those situations.
QYEAR Survey year (YYYY)
SEGCODE NASS SEGMENT identifier (scrambled) - use to link to JES data
SAMPLE coded sample number with year as first two digits, sampno as middle
three digits, and last digit 0; use SAMPLE to link to other datasets
SAMPNO Sequential sample number, within year
STATE State code (format statname.)
TABLE Table on the questionnaire from which response came.
1=from the main questionnaire
3=from the post-harvest applications supplement
LINE Line number (in the questionnaire table) for
applications to that particular field. The first
listed fertilizer application to a field is assigned
line 1, and so on.
CROPF Crop fertilized at this application (format cropname.)
ACRETRTF Number of acres in the field which were fertilized
DATEF Date on which the fertilizer was applied (mmddyy)
METHODF How was it applied?
1=aerial
2=broadcast (ground)
3=foliar application
4=irrigation water
5=band in/over rows
6=alternate rows
7=directed spray
8=chiseled/knifed in
9=in furrow
10=spot treatment
OTRFLDF Was this applied in tandem with another field operation? (1994 only)
CUSTOMF Was this a custom application? (1994 only)
NLBS Total pounds of nitrogen (as N) applied this line
PLBS Total pounds of potassium (as P205) applied this line
KLBS Total pounds of potash (as K2O) applied this line
Note: NLBS, PLBS, and KLBS were generated by NASS from other
questionniare data, some of which was not included in this dataset.
---------------------- HEADER ------------------------
Dataset: 1994/1995 Fall Survey "PEST" Dataset
File Name: pest9495.csv
Date Created: 31 July 1998
#Variables: 25
#Observations: 445
Missing value symbol: . or 0 or .M (see warnings above)
This dataset contains information on applications of pesticides
to the sample field. Note that not every field is represented in
this dataset and that there may be more than one observation
(pesticide application) per field. Be sure to check the variable
PUCC in the MAIN dataset to be sure that these questions were
answered. Note: in a couple of instances in 1995 a CROPP was
explicitly listed even with no pesticide applied if it was not
the only crop in the field that year, to show that there really
DATEP, METHODP, ACRETRTP, PEST, PRODCODE, and REASON are also set
to 0 in those situations, and the generated variables (see below)
have missing values.
QYEAR Survey year (YYYY)
SEGCODE NASS SEGMENT identifier (scrambled) - use to link to JES data
SAMPLE coded sample number with year as first two digits, sampno as middle
three digits, and last digit 0; use SAMPLE to link to other datasets
SAMPNO Sequential sample number, within year
STATE State code (format statname.)
TABLE Table on the questionnaire from which response came.
2=from the main questionnaire
4=from the post-harvest applications supplement
LINE Line number (in the questionnaire table) for
applications to that particular field. The first
listed pesticide application to a field is assigned
line 1, and so on.
CROPP Crop to or for which pesticide was applied (format cropname.)
ACRETRTP Number of acres in the field which were treated
DATEP Date on which the pesticide was applied (mmddyy)
METHODP How was it applied?
1=aerial
2=broadcast (ground)
3=foliar application
4=irrigation water
5=band in/over rows
6=alternate rows
7=directed spray
8=chiseled/knifed in
9=in furrow
10=spot treatment
PRODCODE Product code (see coding sheets)
FORM Form of product (1=dry 2=liquid)
REASON Primary reason for application
1=routine or preventative schedule
2=extension recommendation
3=scouting or observation in field
4=weather
5=field history
6=computer prediction
7=contract requirement
8=other
PEST Primary target pest (if insecticide) (see coding sheets)
ASTDRATE Adjusted standard rate of product (units of lbs/ac for
dry products and gal/ac for liquid products)
CLASS Class code of pesticide product
1=insecticide
4=herbicide
7=fungicide
91=misc., defoliants/desiccants
92=misc., soil fumigants
93=misc., growth regulators
95=misc., others
AICODE1 | Active ingredient codes (see coding sheets). Up to 3 active
AICODE2 | ingredient codes are allowed for each product. This is the
AICODE3 | Primary Chemical (PC) code, formerly known as the Shaughnessey Code.
AIAMT1 | Concentration of each AI (corresponding to AICODEx)
AIAMT2 | Units are lbs-of-AI/lb of dry product, lbs-of-AI/gal of liquid product
AIAMT3 | Exceptions: if PC Code=6401 (Bacillus thuringiensis) then amount is
| missing (coded as .U).
OTRFLDF Was this applied in tandem with another field operation? (1994 only)
CUSTOMF Was this a custom application? (1994 only)
Note: ASTDRATE, CLASS, FORM, AICODE1-AICODE3, and AIAMT1-AIAMT3 were
generated by NASS, and not directly on the questionnaire.
------------- Variable/value Formats and SAS code -------------------
Use the following SAS program to prepare a library of SAS
formats which can be used to assign words to the codes
used for many of the variables in the survey dataset.
Which format to use is indicated in the list of metadata
for the individual variables (in this file, above).
To invoke the variables in a later program, include
the same library statement at the top of the program,
and then for example to format the variables for
the crop and land uses on a field, you would include
the following statement in the data step:
format ltcrop1-ltcrop12 cropname.;
NOTICE:
Grain Hay was coded as 656 in the 1994 questionnaire
but accidentally miscoded as 646 in the 1995 data.
There are two different formats for manure type. One
is for use with 1994 data and one for use with 1995 data.
*************************************************************;
options ls=82 ps=65;
libname library '/pub/emap/95pilot/mstrdata/formats';
proc format library=library;
value statname 10='DELAWARE '
24='MARYLAND '
37='NORTH_CAROLINA'
42='PENNSYLVANIA '
51='VIRGINIA '
54='WEST VIRGINIA ';
value cropname 0='(0) '
1='Alfalfa_Hay_(1) '
2='Barley_(2) '
5='Corn_for_Silage_(5) '
6='Field_Corn_(6) '
8='Cotton_(8) '
11='Hay_(excl._alfalfa)_(11)'
15='Oats_(15) '
16='Peanuts_(16) '
20='Irish Potatoes_(20) '
22='Rye_(22) '
23='Other_Silage_(23) '
24='Sorghum_for_Silage_(24) '
25='Sorghum_for_Grain_(25) '
26='Soybeans_(26) '
31='Sweetpotatoes_(31) '
32='Tobacco_(32) '
33='Watermelons_(33) '
34='Wheat_(all)_(34) '
110='Sweet_Corn_(110) '
116='Greens_(116) '
125='Cowpeas_(125) '
301='Pasture_(301) '
302='CRP_(302) '
304='Idle_Cropland_(304) '
306='Non-Ag_(306) '
310='Clover_(310) '
2106='Cabbage_Fresh_Mkt_(2106)'
2111='Cucumbers_(fresh)_(2111)'
2131='Snap_beans_(2131) ';
value shrtcrop 0='(0) '
1='Alfalfa'
2='Barley '
5='CornSil'
6='FldCorn'
8='Cotton '
11='Hay non'
15='Oats '
16='Peanuts'
20='Potato '
22='Rye '
23='OthrSil'
24='SorgSil'
25='Sorghum'
26='Soybean'
31='Sweetpo'
32='Tobacco'
33='Waterme'
34='Wheat '
110='SwtCorn'
116='Greens '
125='Cowpeas'
301='Pasture'
302='CRP '
304='Idle '
306='Non-Ag '
310='Clover '
2106='Cabbage'
2111='Cukes '
2131='Snapbea'; /* shrtcrop takes less space than cropname */
value dccode
0 = 'single crop'
1 = 'double crop'
2 = 'cover crop';
value tillname
1 = 'None '
2 = 'No-Till '
3 = 'Strip Till '
4 = 'Ridge-Till '
5 = 'Mulch-Till '
6 = 'S.R.M. (Conventional)'; /*S.R.M. means Seasonal Residue Managment */
value econtrol
1 = 'None '
2 = 'Terracing '
3 = 'Contour Crop/Plow'
4 = 'Strip Cropping '
5 = 'Grassed Waterway '
6 = 'Other ';
value manutype
1 = 'Cattle '
2 = 'Hogs '
3 = 'Sheep '
4 = 'Goats '
5 = 'Chickens '
6 = 'Turkeys '
7 = 'Horses '
8 = 'Other Manure '
9 = 'Municipal sludge'; /*use manutype for QYEAR=1994*/
value manurnew
31 = 'Hogs '
32 = 'Sheep '
33 = 'Chickens w/bed '
34 = 'Chickens w/o bed'
35 = 'Turkeys '
36 = 'Horses '
37 = 'Beef Cattle '
38 = 'Dairy Cattle '
39 = 'Other Manure '
40 = 'Municipal sludge'; /*use manurnew for QYEAR=1995*/
value manuunit
1 = 'lbs'
2 = 'cwt'
3 = 'ton';
value pestclas 1='insecticide '
4='herbicide '
7='fungicide '
91='defoliant/dessicant'
92='soil fumigant '
93='growth regulator '
99='other ';
run;
*************************************************************;
------------------------ Derived Indices ----------------------------
---------------------- HEADER ------------------------
Dataset: 1994/1995 Fall Survey derived indices dataset
Date Created: 29 July 1998
#Variables: 14
#Observations: 350
Missing value symbol: . or 0 or .M (see warnings below and in metadata.main)
Note: these derived indices are based on data in main9495.csv and fert9495.csv
File Name: derived9495.csv
These are the variables that will be of interest to the average user
of the dataset. They are "value added" data in that they represent
what the EMAP-Agricultural Lands group used as indicators. They also
went through a greater degree of quality assurance than the original
questionnaire data. See individual metadata files that describe some
of these indices.
OE1 Observed/expected index for LTCROP1 (ratio of observed yield to
the 1980-1989 county average as available from NASS)
OE2 Observed/expected index for LTCROP2
ALLHAY Indicating whether the field had hay in each of the last three years (1=yes)
A value of 1 indicates that there was hay or a combinatino of hay and
pasture for the questionniare year and two previous crop years.
HOWLONG Number of years since the current crop last appeared in the field
HOWMANY Number of distinct crops in the field during the last three years
PMROTYRF Also described above. Number of years in the rotation plan, corrected.
NEFFSEED Nitrogen efficiency index for seed crops.
NEFFHAY Nitrogen efficiency index for hay crops.
NEFFOTHR Nitrogen efficiency index for other crops.
Important: these are expressed in pounds of commercial nitrogen
per pound of harvested crop, so smaller index values indicate
greater efficiency. See the separate metadata file for these indices.
**********************************************************************************
------- Nitrogen use efficiency -----------
To quantify the amount of commercial nitrogen being applied to produce
crops in the mid-Atlantic region, a simple index was calculated.
It consists of the ratio of the weight of applied commercial nitrogen
to the weight of harvested crop. Amounts were determined from the
fall questionnaire data.
Because very different types of plant materials are harvested (seeds,
whole shoots, fruits), the index was divided into three variables, to
avoid accidental and inappropriate comparisons.
NEFFSEED Nitrogen efficiency index for seed crops. This is the ratio of weight
of applied commercial nitrogen to the weight of harvested seed (adjusted
to 0% moisture assuming the following moisture contents of the grain:
field corn 15.5%, barley 14.5%, oats 14%, wheat 13.5%, and soybeans 12.5%.
NEFFHAY Nitrogen efficiency index for hay crops. This is the ratio of the weight of
applied commercial nitrogen to the weight of harvested hay (no adjustment
for moisture content).
NEFFOTHR Nitrogen efficiency index for other crops. This is the ratio of the weight of
applied commercial nitrogen to the weight of harvested product for nonseed,
nonhay crops like cotton and tobacco (no adjustment for moisture content).
Care should be taken when interpreting these indices. A larger index value means
less efficient use of nitrogen, because the harvested amount is in the denominator.
This was necessary because there are many cases where no nitrogen was applied yet
a harvest was obtained, especially for hay. If the ratio were calculated with
the amount of nitrogen in the denominator, the index would be undefined in those
instances, whereas this formula yields a value of 0.
Because there were sometimes more than one crop in the field, it may
have been necessary to combine the applied nitrogen and the weight of
harvested material for an overall index reading. This was only done
if all harvested crops (i.e. not just used for cover) on that field fit
into the same category (seed crop, hay crop, or other).
The index is incomplete in the sense that it does not take into consideration
the nitrogen content of applied manure, for example, but is still useful in that
the efficiency of commercially-produced nitrogen fertilizer may be of interest
from a sustainability perspective.
------- Observed/expected index -----------
In order to be able to assess the productivity of crops in the mid-Atlantic
in such a way that data from diverse crop species could be combined, the
observed/expected index was calculated.
The reported yield for the sample field, converted to standard units (e.g.
standard 56lb. bushes for field corn) was considered the observed value.
The expected values are the averages of the 1980-1989 yield for that crop
in the county in which the sample field was located. These county averages
were obtained from NASS. Expected yields sometimes had to be calculated
with as few as 7 years out of the 10, or sometimes had to be based on a
district rather than a county when there was insufficient information for
a county calculation. EXPECTED VALUES ARE NOT INCLUDED WITH THIS DATASET.
OE1 is the index value for LTCROP1
OE2 is the index value for LTCROP2
------- Crop rotation indices -----------
To express the amount of crop rotation being planned and practiced
in the mid-Atlantic region, three indices were devised and calculated.
***************************
"HOW LONG'S IT BEEN?" INDEX
***************************
The variable HOWLONG is an index of how long the field has been allowed
to be free of this year's harvested (or intended-to-be-harvested) crop,
in other words, did the 1995 crop last appear in 1994? in 1993? or
beyond the window of our questionnaire?
*************************************************************************
* Interpretation: *
* *
* HOWLONG=. out of scope or insufficient data to calculate *
* HOWLONG=1 this year's crop appeared in the field last year *
* HOWLONG=2 this year's crop was last planted two years ago *
* HOWLONG=3 this year's crop was not planted in either of the last *
* two years in this field *
*************************************************************************;
Two uses of the same crop are considered the same crop, e.g. if it
was field corn in 1995 and corn for silage in 1994, then HOWLONG=1.
The index is conservative, in that if any part of the current field
had the same crop in a previous year, that counts against the rotation.
The index is also indiscriminate, in the sense that repetition of a crop
is scored the same regardless of whether it might be good or bad for soil
tilth or erosion, for example. To aid in the interpretation of HOWLONG,
the ALLHAY variable is provided, which takes on the following values:
ALLHAY=. out of scope (e.g. idle land or pasture land in current year)
ALLHAY=0 something other than hay occurred in one or more of the 3 years
ALLHAY=1 the only land use in 3 years was alfalfa hay, other hay, or
both (or in combination with pastureland in previous year(s))
Other rules for multiple crop situations:
Cover crops were disregarded when when figuring the current year's crop,
but if e.g. rye was harvested this year and was used as a cover crop two
years ago, then that counts as having had the crop two years ago. The
problem here is that cover crops may be underreported in years past
because they won't stand out in the minds of the respondents as much as
the harvested crops.
If the field was split between two crops in the current year, consider
the larger acreage to be the one of interest. If it was also split in
a previous year, discard the observation.
If there was a replant after crop failure in the current year, only
count the second crop, regardless of how much time the first crop spent
in the ground. Failed crops in a previous year will count just as a cover
crop would, if this occurred at all.
True double crops in the current year were handled as follows. Since the
index is only for integers, the more conservative of the two possible numbers
was assigned, i.e. according the crop with the shorter time since its last
appearance in the field.
If LTCROP1 is out of scope (pasture, rangeland, or idle land), that
observation was excluded from the calculation (HOWLONG=.).
If no crops are reported for either or both of the previous years, the
observation was excluded.
********************************************************
"HOW MANY DIFFERENT THINGS YOU BEEN GROWIN' HERE?" INDEX
********************************************************
Interpretation:
HOWMANY = the number of crops or land uses on the field during the
last three crop years
Rules:
1) yes, cover crops count toward the total, even though they may
be underreported in previous years
2) side-by-side multiple crops: rather than trying to calculate the
index based on the crop taking up larger portion of field, the
existing field boundary was used, and the crops counted.
3) one-after-the-other multiple crop rules:
a) each memeber of a double crop is counted separately
b) crop failure and replant, only count the crop that was actually harvested.
4) multiple uses are not considered separate crops, so for example sweet corn,
field corn, and corn for silage would only be considered one crop.
5) idle land and fallow were considered separate.
IMPORTANT: This index will have missing values if there is insufficient
data (e.g. no crop or land use given for an earlier year), but it IS
calculated when the current year's land use would officially be out of
scope for our survey (e.g. idle land), as long as there was an annually
harvested herbaceous crop reported in one or more of the previous years.
These cases should be discarded when comparing the HOWLONG index with
the HOWMANY index, since the former excludes all fields which were
out-of-scope for the current survey year.
Notice the differences between this index and the first one. This one is
much more liberal in the sense that it freely assigns large numbers to the
index even if they are cover crops or idle land, etc. The HOWLONG index is
more conservative, e.g. if one of several previous year's crops is the
same as the current crop, that counts as "stopping the clock".
*******************************************
"WHAT'S THE FARMER'S ROTATION PLAN?" INDEX
*******************************************
Interpretation:
PMROTYRF summarizes the answers to two of the questions from the
fall survey, which were more or less:
"Did you have a rotation plan for this field?"
and
"What is the length of the rotation, in years?"
Actually it uses the response to the latter, PMROTYR is the name of
the variable, which is always 0 if there was no rotation plan for the
field. Values of the index, other than 0's, range from 1 to 15 in 1994,
and 2 to 10 for 1995. Since a one-year rotation does not make sense,
those values were changed to either 2 or missing (.) whichever seemed
more reasonable. THUS YOU SHOULD ALWAYS USE PMROTYRF (the F meaning
"fixed") IN YOUR ANALYSES.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *